Obama reassures nervous nation on ailing economy

the taxpayers need not worry about the inaugural ball you are not footing the bill. the bill is paid for my the winning party so stop the nonsense. the Democrats should have their party and if I was not as old as I am I would go. and yes I was invited. so lets stop trying to run the office of President Obama and get on with the rebuilding of America. so often the posters still continue to leave the issue under discussion on the table and take off on their venting. 

EEEEMAN:   Forget inaugeral balls.  That would be a good suggestion if it included much larger solutions, issues and debates.   It is sall potatoes to say that Congress, OBAMA do not have a clue that they contributed to a trillion dollar failure, by their servility, stupidity, and ideological dogma that worships class power, even when it has degenerated into criminal enterprise.  But then OBAMA has betrayed us on IRAQ, on Spying and corporate bailouts that suggests he has no clue, except to let the corrupt insiders tell him to continue Empire and Corporate thievery.

Alternet said this about Congress, especially the worthless, know nothing democrats, supine and spineless as ever:

"Henry Paulson's $700 billion plan to save the world is dead or dying, but the bailout was not killed by his arrogance or his grossly misleading claims about what the public's money would buy. The plan collapsed because it didn't work. The Treasury secretary has launched a PR offensive to revive his falling influence. Too late. The Democrats should be equally embarrassed. In September their leaders in Congress rushed to embrace the Paulson solution, no hard questions asked. They now claim they were duped."

THESE SAME LAME DEMOCRATS PRETEND THAT THEY WERE DUPED REGARDING IRAQ, ONLY TO CONTINUE WITH EMPIRE, AND OCCUPATION.    IT SEEMS THEY ARE ALWAYS DUPED, I.E. CLASS APPEASERS, IMPERIAL THUGS.

http://www.alternet.org/workplace/108138/the_dirty_secret_of_the_financial_crisis%3A_our_banking_system%27s_broken/

I'm sorry but taxing the hell out of us and having the government pay people is not a sustainable road for future growth.  Create jobs in the private sector by allowing businesses to grow.  Tax and spend is not growth.

Taxing the hell out of who? those who make 250K per year or more?

Gosh, if "taxing the hell out of us" means paying 3% more, then you need to revisit the tax structures under Reagan who was satisfied with much higher taxes.

I'm sorry but taxing the hell out of us and having the government pay people is not a sustainable road for future growth.

I agree. What's more disturbing is that instead of raising taxes, Congress will drive the nation deeper into debt. That seems to be their passion these days with the "bailouts" and other fiscal bungling. They will learn eventually that they can't just keep pulling money out of thin air and not suffer consequences.

Create jobs in the private sector by allowing businesses to grow.

That's the best approach. Unfortunately it will be very difficult to grow businesses without the lavish supply of credit available during the past decade. We're in an era of credit contraction and that will stress all businesses. There seems to be very little hope at this time to create private sector jobs and a good possibility that many will be lost as conditions deteriorate.

Which is why businesses need to be able to hold onto more of their money so they can do it the old fashioned way instead of burning the candle at both ends.

Behind my screen -

Your lost in the rhetoric.  Quit ignoring basic economic principals.

Getout---the old fashioned way?? you mean the "trickle down" way that doesn't work?? The 'trickle down" way that increased profit margins, did not create any new jobs, and fattened the paychecks going in to CEO's pockets? Is that the "old fashioned way" you were referring to??

No.  I mean by saving and expanding when you can afford it by practicing good business principals instead of using credit for everything and being manipulated by regulations that the government has used to run your business for you.

Thanks for clarifying that ...I agree that the overblown use of credit has been a huge factor in the problems we are facing right now...I disagree with your assessment of regulation....Deregulation of the financial industry was the impetus for the sub-prime mortgage crisis....

Oh contrare, the over regulation of the CRA is what forced banks into making bad loans.  If they didn't play ball, then they were not allowed to expand or open new branches.  The government, in a way, forced them to do this if they wanted to grow.  A couple banks played it safe and chose not to.  Those banks are in much better position right now.  Am i saying this is the only cause of the meltdown?  No.  But I am providing one example were over regulation was a HUGE factor in this housing mess.

@1.10, Getout, are you writing satire?

No, he's dispensing truth. There have been many articles that have outlined the role of the CRA and FannieMay and FreddieMac in this meltdown; you should read a few of them.

OH shut up EEEEman. Your post is asinine and has little to do with the present fiasco. Balls...Obama has plenty...you......not much or the post wouldn't have been so sophomoric.

JustLynn

I agree that the overblown use of credit has been a huge factor in the problems we are facing right now

The credit bubble that is now deflating was exacerbated by deregulatory policies of the Federal Reserve under Alan Greenspan. Expect the problems to get worse.

Deregulation of the financial industry was the impetus for the sub-prime mortgage crisis....

Governmental tampering (misregulation) with the housing market beginning with the CRA and culminating in the meltdown of Freddie and Fannie led to untold amounts of economic hardship. Pin that tail on the donkey.

Americana's still has faith and hope. Being therefore diligent, prudent, temperate and discreet from the start, would create an atmosphere of change in this vital part of our governments history.

Actually I heard on the news that FDR had scaled back his in some way because of concerns of how it would look during the depression to have too big a party.

Don`t get me wrong, no one is happier for a change than me, I would have voted for Marvin Martian over GWB or McSame.

I don`t expect miracles of the guy either, just slow steady progress. What we should expect from them all. We seem to be in high speed reverse right now.

His plans for improving our economic crisis are sound. We all need to support the President in every way we can to help implement this plan. It will require that we stay informed and communicate with our Representatives. No President can do it alone, Congress must support his policies.

Doesn't anyone here get this?   What is "American" to support the most anemic, conservative democrats and their wimpy policies that now are corrupting OBAMA's cabinet.   You notice when the corporate media, including AP reports that a "long" or a "short" list of choices, regarding positions, they always translate into the same corrupt, imperial and corporate class thugs, what David Sanger of the NEW YORK TIMES, a ideological cheerleader, calls "pragmatic" not "ideological" completely clueless that his corrupt terminology and multiple assumptions automatically are supported by the same corporate media that cheered on illegal wars, and cheered on criminal bail outs.

With no discussion how ideological centers are determined, and worse yet, without referencing what is dogmatic, or who is an ideologue, but then definging all these corrupt class policies as "pragmatic", the corporate media and their ideologues have failed to show us how they determined the social center, moral center over their corrupt and criminal, imperial center, corporate center, except to assume the low level of change, CHANGE WE CANNOT BELIEVE IN, which will not be able to deal with an extreme crisis, Depression, through the same mindless policies.

You cannot have an FDR moment, with imperial, corporate Clintons and Bushies in your cabinet, full of warmongers, Zionists, NEOCONS and former liberal warhawks like Hillary and Biden.   These people, criminals were part of the trickle down free market disaster, that supported deregulation.   Clinton followed Reagans's right wing ideology, Supply side economics, where he supported NAFTA, free trade agreements, that destroyed good paying jobs to slave markets overseas, and then dismantled FDR's Glass Steagall regulation. 

These right wing democrats all supported an illegal war in IRAQ, and all voted endlessly for more occupation, endless financing of the surge, with OBAMA even cheering the illegal surge, after he said he was opposed to the illegal war.   Corporate fascism and class Empire are the hallmarks of both corporate parties and OBAMA'S weak programs, contradictory policies are a sure sign of failure, CHANGE WE CANNOT BELIEVE IN.

Finally the corporate media plays ideological games with the public, as the "short" or "long" list are Rham Emanuel's corporate imperial list, to promote more of these criminal and corporate policies, and the PROGRESSIVES once again got chumped, through their own delusions about the character of two class parties with the same class ideologies, that represent corporate fascists, not the people.   OF COURSE THE NEW YORK TIMES AND THE CORPORATE MEDIA, AP INCLUDED, WILL NOT TELL YOU THAT.

Robert Blevins - AB of Seattle

Bush and company did more damage to this country than any other Executive branch in recent history.

It's time for you to check into the Reality Hotel. GWB and his administration did not cause the economic collapse we are experiencing. Its roots are primarily endogenous within the private sector.

This isn't to say the government is blameless though. What began as Democratic tampering with the private sector housing market and morphed into two huge ticking time bombs helped things along. And in their final years, who was bought and paid for by executives of Freddie and Fannie to keep the gravy train on its tracks?

Over the span of his career, Obama ranks No. 2 in campaign donations from Fannie and Freddie, taking over $125,000. Dodd, head of the Senate Banking panel, is tops at $165,000. Clinton, ranked 12th, has collected $75,000.

Clinton administration official Jamie Gorelick also got taken care of by the Fannie-Freddie circle. So did top Clinton aide Rahm Emanuel, among others.

That's graft. Are you so naive as to think it will end simply because two of the players are moving to 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue?

Marion Otto

His plans for improving our economic crisis are sound.

Washington cannot "fix" the economic ills of the private sector. His plans are worthless.

We all need to support the President in every way we can to help implement this plan.

Not me. No one in government knows how to respond to a crisis like the one we are in now. They are in panic mode and that's dangerous. Instead of supporting them, I will be protecting myself from the damage they will cause.

It will require that we stay informed and communicate with our Representatives.

Remember when the boneheaded $700B "bailout" was in Congress? The people gave their reps an earful of "no" and "hell no". What did Congress do? They passed it anyway. So much for communicating.

Obama economic plan aims for 2.5M new jobs by 2011

Yes but they will all be in Government. Even now the Government jobs sector is the only one with positive growth.

What I see missing here is the failure to see this is not about individuals, but about similar ideologies, class outlooks, class parties which both particpated in imperial Empire, illegal wars, and Criminal Policies of deregulation, where corporate fascism and Empire were the result.    It doesn't matter how "long" or "short" the imperial, corporate list of that Zionist,Neocon, right wing corporate democrat, Rham Emanuel, presents to OBAMA, if the same corrupt class and imperial thugs are on the list.

rick

president elect obama did not call for the 700bil. bailout. btw you just keep lookin' out for you, and to hell with the rest of us, right?

i guess its always good to give a person the benefit of the doubt and support when they are elected into positions of authority! people like criticising but really the important thing will be to be open minded.Americans must unite and rally behind Obama and crew because they are into this thing together.People cant wait to see America fall apart because of this financial crisis but really the Americans should be positive if they are going to make it.

Has to be better than anything the useless lame duck proposed - the great decider or actually procrastinator.  The righties are quick to criticize, but I'm hoping for a better result at the end of the term or terms.  I waited forever in Bush's term to see what would happen I finally gave up.  These conservative complainers have already started before anything has even begun.  That's what has destroyed the GOP party hate and judging - they ate everything up around them and then started on themselves. 

Marion

You are right. He sat on his do-nothing and hoped situation didn't touch him till McCain drug him back to Washington kicking and screaming. He didn't even come out with his "four point proposal" till Tuesday after McCain announced a 5 pt. one on previous Friday which by the way the news didn't tell you. Where McCain messed up is voting for it after the democrats added everything. I don't fault him though for suspending his campaign to help out. That is what we pay Senators to do, not run for office. I believe the shape of economy goes back to high price of oil and gas which the democrats refuse to buldge on. If a person has to pay 3-4 times what he was paying to go to work, it leaves less to pay other payments. Couple that with higher food and electric bills, some had to decide what to pay and what to let slide and it finally caught up with them

Marion -

president elect obama did not call for the 700bil. bailout.

My point was not Obama, but rather that communicating with Congress, which you had suggested, was ineffective.

btw you just keep lookin' out for you, and to hell with the rest of us, right?

I look out for myself and my neighbors in need. My donated professional services to a local charity saved them tens of thousands of dollars in consulting fees, assisting them in their mission of feeding hungry people. I don't look out for people who can make ends meet unless they are my friends or relatives.

Uhh... Joe,

McCain got in the way. Obama knew that presidential politics would not help the discussions. McCain was grandstanding, caused problems in the congress while he was there not doing anything, and then left.

All the bill required of either McCain or Obama was a vote on the floor. Both were there for that.

Grandstanding like McCain did only fools the foolish.

"Time to check into the Reality Hotel. Bush and company did more damage to this country than any other Executive branch in recent history."

Oh really? It certainly seems to me that Obama's compatriots in Congress (you know, that branch of the federal government you Democrats love to control becuase it is in charge of the purse strings?) had quite allot to do with helping to CAUSE all that "damage" too.

"U.S. voters put Obama into the White House to address the most serious crisis in a couple of generations."

Heh. Of course, you really meant, "U.S. voters,  as duped by the fawning syncophantic main-stream media who lubricated his way into the oval office with their mindless drool for two years, put Obama into the White House..." ...right?

"And Obama has made up his mind to try. Get behind him. Be an American. Trust the man and give him a chance. He's the Prez now, and deserves not only your respect, but your support. Until he somehow shows can't do the job, you have to play fair."

Oh coming from left-leaning Democrats, that pitch is the epitome of bullcrap. Let's remind everyone of how well you did that for President Bush now, _twice_. "He STOLE the election!"...sound familiar? You have absolutely no credibility for making this request of anybody at all. NONE.

"Besides, what have you got left to lose? The Bush administration already took everything else away."

<rolls eyes> puhleeze. That statement is such rich BS, my lawn is now growing quickly (and that's a really good trick since it's late November and the temperatures are freeezing outside).

If a half percent is enough for Bush supporters in 2004 to claim a mandate and proclaim a grand movement, mark, Perhaps you should take a step back and realize that there was a 7 percent popular vote difference between Obama and McCain, let alone the size of the  Electoral Collage victory.

The VOTERS decided Obama should be president. At the very least, attempt to help witht he effort to undo the real damage Bush's administration has done.

Heh. Of course, you really meant, "U.S. voters,  as duped by the fawning syncophantic main-stream media who lubricated his way into the oval office with their mindless drool for two years, put Obama into the White House..." ...right?

MarkB_08109

A little graft went a long way too.  See my post #2.5 above.

hey Behind My Screen,

(BTW - how does that work, I need to be in front of my screens to see anything...?)

I don't recall President Bush trumpeting some massive mandate for conservative change after winning the election. Nor did he begin to make sweeping changes to our government or society. No massive "privatize Social Security" intitiatives, though it was mentioned, no "put the Bible back on our Schools" drives...not much at all, really. At least not until after we were attacked on 9/11/01, that is. Oh, I see, you're still blaming him for that as having been an "inside job" right? I see.

As for your 7% claim, see my previous "duped by the fawning syncophantic main-stream media" for an adequate explanation of that.

you may not recall it but then, that would be selective forgetfulness.

You may consider those people duped, but that does not explain the Democratic tidal wave of wins at every level of government.

Sorry, Republicans lost on issues, as they always do when issues are what an election is about.

Liberal medial blowout, Hollywood nobodies talking like authories on what the average American needs, Oprah's money, and impressionable first-time voters looking to "make history" and create "change" is what caused this.  I only hope we all don't suffer too much because of a bad decision that people made.

I am so glad the Republicans are taking the position that the American peopel are stupid. That will make it so much easier to win in 2012.

Behind my screen: I would really like to think that O's opponents would not be so irrational (Mark leading the pack), but it appears that is not to be. I take offense at Mark especially...I think he thinks his intellectual oratory would be lofty and self righteous vs. the fact that his facts are wrong and he right along with "others" just won't admit or go there.

You've did a great job handling them. Keep on going. I'm getting to laugh and as you well know, these days there's not much to laugh at.

Along that line, jestjohn, what will happen when Obama puts this plan into action, then realizes just how worthless many Americans really are? It won't do anything for our country when Obama creates these great jobs, only to have lazy people refuse to do them.

For the record, before I get bashed for saying anything negative about Obama, I'm not dissing what Obama wants to do. I think that's great. I voted for him as a man to get us back on our feet. I just know that we have a lot of people in this country who want a hand out and not a real job.

Should America fall short to expectation. In answers to your questions, globally there is a major adjustment to the world's economy taking place. America is no longer the primary force, India, China, the Middle East and Russia have now become significant. Was this due to America looking inwardly to use of products that were labeled according to trade agreement, or automobiles requiring affordable fuel consumption, or shrewd economic planning? The point being made is that America needs to look at progression in ways that will not change our lifestyle but enhance it back to the point where the global economy will reflect it, our country now sits at  a crossroad, spending habits need adjusted in a manner that is forward thinking. This need not be buy American but buy effectively, would one buy a comparable SUV should it be environmentally more fuel efficient and provide the same quality with alternative energy, absolutely if one were available or even market ready. Expectation to this happening will only occur when manufactures know that the demands of the expectations are consumer driven. Requiring only families to change spending and purchasing habits does not reflect diligent, prudent or temperate behavior of our political leadership. Change is to start right from the get go in all phases of our government.

Cmarshing...I can understand what you are saying but, No there will be no shortage of willing and eager bodies to push a shovel and work a back to keep a job.

Yeah, there are plenty of lazy people just shooting for a handout, I really doubt the  ay sayers that Obama is giving ANYONE a free ride, and I think he'll be the first one to tell them that. If there is one thing I have noticed from him is with him you better bring your "A" game or don't come at all.

Studius, I'm not saying that Obama wants to give anyone a free ride. If he did, he wouldn't be coming up with these types of solutions to put people back to work and shore up the economy. I'm saying that he is going to quickly realize just how few of people are actually willing to do that kind of job for the payment they will receive. It is pretty easy to say that the government isn't going to be paying people a fortune to fix a road. I just don't think people are willing to do that kind of work.

Dang cmarshing....little pessimistic there aren't you? We all certainly have reason to be but I don't blame it on laziness at all.  I'm quite sure Obama is aware of those who want a free ride but stop, think and add it all up. Lazy who helped vote him in are by far in the minority. Lazy doesn't fit the % bill.

I"m way over qualified and in the wrong professional field (unless O wants to pay me to counsel those distressed suicidal souls).  I've worked for myself a long time BUT GUESS WHAT: with a MA I'm  going back to school as of this present semester for an Associates degree in nursing. The jobs are there, I'm not stupid and feel with both degrees I should find somewhere to be.

I am not sticking around to see if he survives the year.  I am moving on.

Good luck with that.  If you are trained in a highly technical field, you might do ok, but I wouldn't expect a pay raise.

We haven't had a free enterprise for the last 8 years, we've had a free for all.  Now companies begin to realize outsourcing was a bad idea.  What if they brought those jobs back to the US?  There might be someone with enough income to purchase their products again.

Lkessler, says, let Capitalism work, when free markets i.e. corporate markets destroyed the economy and the midlde class, and a majority that opposed the Clinton-Reagan supply side deregulation. 

What does it take to get people to look at history, ideology, and terminology, another Depression, that convinces us that Capitalism works?   Talk about delusions.

Likessler and Monica, it doesn' have to be high tech....and likessler you CAN do it yourself....if you have the capital or a group of friends...be your bosses competitor and put his dumb ass out of work....be the company you think this one should be.

I saw the writing on the wall in 2004 when I noticed Paulson and Cox getting chummy and the rules started changing...cashed out and got with my brother. Now, we are self employed, have cattle (basically recession proof) citrus and for when building comes back we have started a tree farm. Our hands have zero worries about work, their families are insured, housed and with the exception of vegetables, if we need meat we go pick out the unlucky steer. Wild boar here are plentiful, and we live near the Atlantic and Lake Okeechobee...those trips turn out to be family outtings for everyone and we all get seafood.....just have to set your minds to making changes folks....e are Americans!! The smartest people in the world....don't worry about wha we'll get from the government, go get it...this is the perfect time!!!

LKES?; Supply and demand are in the sh**hole because the price was too high, demand went low. Economically speaking, the prices should come down when demand is low. But the all knowingcapitalistic "greedyguts" kept on gouging until there's nothing left to gouge. Let 'em go down. But without their parachutes and take their retirement right along with everyone Else who have lost theirs over "THEM"

Economy 101 again: Don't mess with it? It takes money to make money. I think Dems did a good job of getting a Plan from the B3. then show them the money or really, I'd let them go down too. Forcing their hand. That's sure piss the capitalistic big dogs off huh? But by golly THEY COULD GET UP OFF THEIR LAZY PAMPERED REARS and get with the real world.

And we're going to be in  an economic sh--hole anyway for a long time.  Took nearly a decade to get here.

meneither:  I hope you caught your catch-22 above.    You wrote:  "the price was too high, demand went low" That's what's supposed to happen in a capitalistic market.

When prices come down, demand goes up--because it is cheaper to buy.  Then it readjusts again and again to accomodate supply and demand.  That's what supply and demand is all about.  Again, check out any economics book (a basic one will do).

Prices are an important market signal. That's why you usually get rationing when an outside force holds prices artificially low. I recommend this basic economics book, followed by this book.

I  recommend "Markets Don't Fail" by Brian Simpson. 

Thanks, I'll check it out.

There is no complaint about an inaugural ball, there is a request to be prudent in the celebration, and diligent in the effort to promote change, reflecting discreet requirements in planning the celebration. In other words effective planning and spending, requirements that the families of the USA are now having to put forth.

Studasbagus: That's exactly how I was raised. Cows, horses, huge gardens, fruit trees, sweet water wells AND light brine wells to water with and on and on. right down to gathering berries ourselves in the wild berry thickets for jelly, pastures etc for lambsquarter. Can't do that now due to fly over crop dusting.

  I have tried and tried to explain to my husband....better sit up and pay attention but he wasn't raised like me and really has no concept about survival. We live in horrible clay dirt  but nothing new top soil and correct practices couldn't handle.

I know this sounds like the death toll but hey, I"m not willing to turn my money loose unless I have to. Sorry about the decreased spending but then thrifty does have it's high side!

crystal,

 So then we talk about higher wages and either fewer jobs or increased cost of goods.  Which sounds better to you? 

I know that this sounds completely counter-intuitive, but the fact of the matter is that it's really the middle and lower classes that are the ones that drive the economy. The reason for this is actually pretty simple when you look at what the average person from that class does with extra money:

Someone who's rich will generally just either invest it or put it into a savings account. The middle class and the poor however will immediately go out and spend that money on one of a million things that they have needed for a while but haven't gotten the cash to actually get. That haircut that they've been putting off- a new pair of shoes to replace the ones with the holes in them- they may actually go out to the movies once in  a while...etc, etc, etc.

Our system has been so skewed out of whack towards protecting the rich that we need to change it back and it's as simple as that. Supply Side/ Trickle Down economics got us here. We know it doesn't work. We also know that Demand Side economics does.

There have already been many articles and studies that have shown that the economy historically improves under demand side economics whereas it doesn't under supply side. So, as I said, while it does sound counter-intuitive, we already know it works.

I agree, Sickntired, except when the government makes it profitable for companies to do the wrong thing, which Bush is continuing to do even in these last days of his administration.

Sick: Your philosophy is part of the problem.  As a responsible person above, If things cost more I spend less or the same amount and get fewer things.  My budget doesn't change regardless of wage increases (goes to retirement and college), or heightened costs. The amount that goes out stays the same even if we have to shift from spending money to cover higher cost necessities.  How does fewer jobs tranlate into a better economy when the wage increse is minimal?  That extra $40 bucks a week over a relatively small percent of the population is going to get the ball really rolling?  And what of the laid off workers sacrificed to give others a dollar an hour more?  That equates to more people collecting tax dollar supplied benefits.  And how does that relate to fewer people paying taxes?  Hmmm...we either have LESS money supporting MORE people or further tax increases either on the top 5% (employers) or more of us pesky middle classers.  Which do you think would happen? You cannot fix one problem without creating another.

It doesn't seem counter-intuitive, it is.

Sorry crystal but the simple truth is that if you do not take care of the middle class- if the average person can't afford to live, then the entire economy goes down the drain: "You can make the cheapest shoes in creation, but if no one can afford to buy them then we are all going barefoot," and, consequentially, you are also going out of business.

Why else do you think that suddenly everyone's talking about getting main street back on track?

Look, you can argue all you want but the numbers and history has supported this. Don't believe me- seriously don't- go look it up. The fact is that your trickle down theories are what has gotten us into this mess and not the other way around.

But you know what? You're going to believe whatever you want, and that's just fine with me. That's the beauty of America.

Sick: I'm not a Rep and trickle down is coined term.  The simple fact of if you have less you spend less applies to everyone.  If someone doesn't they have their head in their rear end.  Do you know the percentage of people in the US that makes minimum wage? According to the Dept of Labor in 2007 slightly over 2% of all hourly wage employees, that's 0.56% of the population.  Again I ask how 2% of the work force making $0 more a week is going to make a widefelt impact when it equates to either higher costs or fewer jobs (hint fewer workers mean fewer dollars spent, less sales tax collected etc and more needing to take government assistance)?  You know that equates to at most a couple shirts or jeans or a single meal out, assuming one spends the money.  It becomes a wash at the very best.

I love main street and small business, and that is where I spend as much discretionary money as possible.  How does wage increases affect them and their community?  Do you realize that the bulk of "small businesses"" employ far more than 10 employees according to the small business association?  That is where the jobs are at, and they are the ones that will take the brunt of all these wonderful programs Obama wants to introduce. I wonder what happens to them in all of this? 

Your seem to be looking at a portait, while I am looking at a landscape.

Well honey, if you aren't a republican and aren't enamoured of their economic policies, maybe you shouldn't be quoting their favored talking points- but hey, whatever floats your boat. As I said before, this is America, you can believe whatever you want to believe- whether history or the numbers are on your side or not. Good luck with that and have a wonderful life there sweetie, but the majority of us have gotten tired of your promises of a "better economy" when we realized that it just does not work. Call it whatever you want, because it's still a failure that we are thankfully, done with.

Sick: I was not condescending to you, and I see that you cannot explain your theory, so you resort to rudeness.  That's okay, I am able to behave like an adult, so I will say thanks for educating me;-) I pray Obama's policies fixes all that ails you, and that you will not be one of those disappointed with the outcome.  May God bless your family as He has ours!

Crystal: Rude was NOT what Sick was doing. Sick tried and tried to explain the principles you espouse simply do not work, never have and never will UNLESS you live on Silk Stocking Street :)   The economical absolute truth? Sick is right..

Peppering commentary with honey, sweetie etc. is RUDE.  Simply put, let me know when you have a full time job with at least a minimum wage pay average and benefits from someone who is not in the upper or upper-middle class signing your paycheck. 

"honey " and "sweetie" are totally condescending ways to refer to a woman if you aren't her husband or lover....You can disagree with someone without being condescending Sick.....

I agree, Sickntired, except when the government makes it profitable for companies to do the wrong thing, which Bush is continuing to do even in these last days of his administration.

Monica D.

Do you have a problem with Democratic presidents and members of Congress making it profitable for companies (banks, in this case) doing the wrong thing (lending to unsuitable borrowers)? That's what led to the Fannie/Freddie meltdown and a good chunk of the subprime loan mess.

The campaigns of Barack Obama and many other Democrats benefited from graft.

Over the span of his career, Obama ranks No. 2 in campaign donations from Fannie and Freddie, taking over $125,000. Dodd, head of the Senate Banking panel, is tops at $165,000. Clinton, ranked 12th, has collected $75,000.

Instead of bringing Obama and his cronies to heel for the damage they helped cause, yall gave him an attaboy with four years in the White House. Nice job on that.

It's not all about Bush.

"honey " and "sweetie" are totally condescending ways to refer to a woman if you aren't her husband or lover

crystal in AL and JustLynn

You are both right about condescending epithets. Newsvine is teeming with boors. Over in another thread I reprimanded some asshat whose reply to a woman poster revealed him as less than a gentleman, and got it tossed back in my face. I've found that criticizing rude behavior is generally an exercise in futility. Usually I just opt to put the boors on ignore.

You are ladies and deserve to be treated like ladies, regardless of your points of view.

rick

@6.11 Rickace

Instead of bringing Obama and his cronies to heel for the damage they helped cause, yall gave him an attaboy with four years in the White House. Nice job on that.

Bummer.  We sure wouldn't want someone in the White house who champions the poor.  Who would you rather he champion?

The productive! Where would the poor be without them?

I am a lady--and I agree:  since Barack O. champions the division of wealth equally, I definitely suggest he champion the cause of those trying to make the wealth.  I have a bumper sticker that says:  "I AM A REPUBLICAN--BECAUSE I CANNOT BE ON WELFARE AND MILLIONS ON IT DEPEND ON ME."

*lol*

oh, so the poor are poor because they don't work hard enough.  I'll take note of that, and I'll ignore my 15 years of taking care of a special needs child.  Thanks for enlightening me.

 Hey, if you have a special needs child, and you think that applies to you, you're far more easily offended than most viners.   But, truth be told, go check out most people on welfare--they drive a better car than I do (1991 Honda), they have a nicer house (generally, these people live in houses, dear, not apartments), they have cellphones (I don't have one, and I could use one), wear a ton of jewelry that I don't have, so really, if you care and wish to lump yourself with them, more power to you, but I stand by my statement--millions on welfare depend on me and the sweat off my back (and countless others like myself) to keep their standard of living (and keep lowering mine).

The offense I feel is the regret that I was taught philosophies such as your own.  But forgive me for pointing out that you openly admit you cannot look past your own stereotypical prejudice of why people are on welfare.  You clearly do not grasp their reality.

No Monica.  I grasp my reality--my taxes keep going up, my nation continues toward that left tilt of socialism, and my paycheck keeps shrinking.  I say we leave philanthropy to the rich and famous.  I'm neither, and I don't appreciate forced philanthropy.

President-elect Barack Obama on Saturday outlined his plan to create 2.5 million jobs in coming years to rebuild roads and bridges and modernize schools while developing alternative energy sources and more efficient cars.

Sounds like a plan. Why didn't Bush go that route?

Perhaps because Bush understands that the purpose of the government is to govern. Job creation is a role of the private sector, which is in bad shape at the moment and getting worse.

The notion of "modernizing" schools BTW is meaningless if they keep teaching the same @!$%#ty curriculum and continue to allow distractions like toys (cellphones) and snack food in the classrooms.

Like FDR (and Lincoln) Obama is going to have to experiment

Like Hoover, Obama is going to get buried by the wholesale economic collapse.

You are correct!!!  Spain gets over 40% of their electricity from wind, Germany gets huge amounts from wind and now mandates any new buildings be cov ered with solar panels.  I hav e ZERO problems driving down the road and watching propellers turn and making progress!! And whoever put them in has a job....whoever watches the meter at the plant has a job....

in-halfdotcom:

"Top down mandates" are all products of class elites within their class hierarchies, filtering out democracy for class despotism are the products of a class structure, that always is top down, so long as we agree to class parties, class ideologies, class policies, without voting for real alternatives, and moving beyond a once vote intervention to full scale civics participation on all policies from below.

Chicken, egg.  Cart, horse. 

Stagnant minds produce a stagnant country! The only bad idea is to do nothing!

Exactly....why cry in your beer that someone else made.....become a brewmaster!! lol

Studiusbagus - Good ideas, but there is a problem as you can already tell by the comments.  The right says the left wants free hand outs, but you need to remember that the right just wants to sit and complain and have a free ride while being a useless information highway - trading invisible money. 

They are scared, for the last 8 years they have been told what to think, how to react, it's that "you're with us or against us" mantra....We have to get b ack to "Mom n' Pop" businesses folks...bypass the Walmart, pay a couple extra bucks and know that it stays in your neighborhood.....when i go to convenience stores, the first thing I ask is "who's the owner?" If they tell me Sunoco, or Exxon, or BP, or whoever...I walk right back out and find a local owner....best part is they remember me and know how I feel, they treat me very well, they appreciate my business. I don't care if they came from Kansa or Katmandu...they have a family here and they are my neighbor.....

Great! There you all go again:  Reason number 3,345 to become my own brewmeister!

This isn't just about tax dollars...this is about getting up, dusting ourselves off and getting busy.

I am one of the unfortunate ones that trust Obama to do the right thing...with that being done I will still keep an eye but not be obsessed as I was with George Bush and "Oh God now what??"  Now, I will get on with the business of my own life and those around me....great change for once!

he has already said the deficit is going to get bigger before it gets smaller, so far he has been correct with everything said and hasn't sugar coated his comments...some may not like that but I enjoy the transparancy and forthright statements...

Yes, it's nice to have someone being truthful with us instead of lies and cover-ups like the Bush administration.  It's already better than the incomplete sentences and bumbles of ignorance from lame duck.  Maybe that's the problem -  people don't understand an intelligent speaker that can form complete sentences.  I think it's wonderful  and am looking forward to the possible growth of new jobs.

Studiusbagus - I, too, "trust" Obama, as much as I can trust someone I don't know. I feel much more at ease now that he's going to be president. And prudent leading is much like "getting busy". Here's to a turn in the right direction. Good for us.

I'm so happy you feel this way...we have to take care of each other, now that I feel we have someone in the leadership role that expects and demands people to use their intelligence....I have the feeling that the common "slackers" that have been used to the welfare, and the government handouts are not going to be happy soon....I do think that many from the right will come around if they actually see there is work being done and people are actually serious about putting the wheels back on the wagon....right now there is plenty of shock and they want to blame anyone else but their own party for this mess....who cares? Let's just get this thing moving again!!!

I'm just curious, if we've spent so much on infrastructure, how is it we have collapsed bridges and so many more that fail inspection but aren't repaired?

Even 5 billions seems small in comparison to what we spend on a war we shouldn't have started.

Because  local politicians will often spend money on things that garner them more attention (and votes)instead of the purposes for which it was intended.

comparison to what we spend on a war we shouldn't have started.

If you want an actual account of the factors and thinking involved at the time (instead of the media meme) read War and Decision. Then you will have enough knowledge of the case for it to effectively argue your side. Right now, you don't sound very knowledgeable just spouting talking points.

Thank you. most of the bridges in our country were built during the NEW DEAL era, making them no less than 70 to 80 years old. I am not saying that reconstruction is a bad idea. I am simply stating a fact. That 2.5 million people are not qualified for Bridge,Road,and School construction.  We would end up importing foreign labor to support this proposal. Counter productive.. How about a program that would stimulate small business. 50%of the nations jobs come from this sector. The self employed are not covered by un employment. they are the invisible lost work force in this country. Stimulate that group Mr.Oboma,and you will acheive something tangeble.

Waynester - Because you read a book (someone's opinion based on how they interpreted "facts") doesn't make your opinion any more worthwhile than mine. You have no idea what my opinion is based on, so your comment was an assumption (and offensive), rather than inquiring and/or thought provoking. Your insult is rejected.

You really think infrastructure repair and development will not induce growth from small business??  Got news for you, it will explode the growth of small business! Suppliers in the community, restaurants, clothing, tools, rentals, labor agencies, all will explode, which means trucking will grow, food production will increase.....this will be the era of rickle UP economics!!

Studius you are dreaming.  If white collar workers keep losing jobs they aren't going to be spending money --- small business, etc., isn't going to need ANYTHING delivered on new roads if their services and/or goods aren't being purchased.

Good Point. Thanks for the input. that is not what i am saying. We need a broader approach to new job creation, including the small business sector out side of construction. P.S. only the largest suppliers, Multi million dollar bridge contractors, etc, will receive these contractors,I know, i have worked in that arena for over 3 decades.  O.K., a few independent flag persons and haulers will benefit.  Take a look at the map,We are a huge diverse country. Federal rescue? i am reminded of New Orleans, Still not done.

I hear you.  Look at 9/11 and the WTC.  Years and still nothing in it's place to stimulate the economy down there.  Should have done something right away to keep business there.  No business that had to relocate to New Jersey or elsewhere is coming back.  That is a big problem.  When I worked on Wall Street, all those small businesses and the restaurants only thrived because of the big businesses located in that area.  The place folds up after hours and on a weekend.

Raymond, I was in the industry for quite some time too....not as long as you but, I followed the huge bridge contractors and installed and sold erosion control systems and pumped grout in to fabric forms, and capped landfills with Poly, I made great money as a sub and had employees...every job has subs and suppliers....

I do understand what you mean, but with this starting, other industries will pick up, new businesses will arise...all has to start somewhere and why not in infrastructure ? It's a good broad industry.

Thanks for your positive spin. Raymond

Waynester - Because you read a book (someone's opinion based on how they interpreted "facts") doesn't make your opinion any more worthwhile than mine

No, someone who was there, directly involved in policy-making and has the documents to back up his "opinions". You really should check out the reference before posting about it.

Exactly Wainster.  Just like the $4 million or so the dems spent to rename the NY Triboro bridge after JFK?????  Why??????  Spend it in Massachusetts -- Kennedy country.  Then Patterson cries the blues we need more revenue through taxes, etc.  Here is another reason why I do not put my faith in Obama or the democrats.

So, what's your plan Flash?

Provide incentives for big business to STAY in the U.S., put caps on the "golden parachutes" of CEOs, start putting limits on the amount of outsourcing of work/services to India, etc.  Just a start.  There are many, many people that are losing jobs or have lost their jobs that don't do construction work.  I don't claim to have all the answers Studius but I do beleive the answer is not in construction.

As I recall, Obama has addressed some of these issues (golden parachutes, free trade)  and I feel confident he'll do so again once he's in office. But, if you mean big tax breaks (incentives) to big business, we already know that didn't work.

And there are so many things that need to be constructed - roads, bridges, new energy sources, new transportation - which require all types of skills from the top exec to the laborer.

They didn't work because we needed more regulation as I mentioned to limit what and how much business can be set up outside the country.  Yes, one of the ways to keep big business is tax incentives.  Why do you think Long Island has only about 2 really large companies.  For one thing our leaders, allowed out of state companies to acquire them but the bigger reason is these companies can do busines elsewhere cheaper.  NY is one of the highest taxed states in the Country.  Why would any business stay?  Those that stay just pass that cost on to the consumer.  That's why I do believe with caps on the CEOs big bonuses, if big business is helped, we help ourselves.  Don't you think after NAFTA all these manufacturing plants closed and moved to Mexico because not only was the labor cheaper so was the cost of doing business.  We don't need new bridges and roads.  They need to be fixed.  Use some of that tax money we pay for that.  On Long Island, and I can only speak for it since this is where I live, we build more vacant strip malls that don't ever get filled.  We have older strip malls that have vacant stores.  Why waste money to build something that isn't needed?  Just to add another number to the temp jobs?  How many white collar jobs do you really think repairing roads and bridiges takes?  Again, it's the same thing as the "service" jobs...they cannot replace the better paying manufacturing jobs that were lost.

The 2.5 million jobs Obama is talking about creating is an "immediate fix" that we desperately need to get people working. And if you were listening to anything but FOX talking points Flash, you also heard Obama talk about examining trade agreements to see if they were beneficial to the US and NOT extending them if they weren't, offering incentives to businesses to bring production BACK to the US, and offering small businesses a $3000 tax credit for each new job created.....THOSE are long term fixes, that combined with the immediate creation of jobs to get people working , will work towards a long term fix.....

JustLynn

The government cannot "fix" any problems in the private sector economy. Their solutions must originate endogenously within the private sector. If you're interested, there's a discussion of the topic in this recent article of mine.

It just so happens I already read your article Rick...but I still hold that , unfortunately, the private sector and public sector are inevitable intertwined, therefore anything that affects one affects the other. The only way to completely protect oneself from problems in the public sector would be to put all your money in jars and bury them in your yard. And even then, when you go to retire, the money in those jars will be worth much less than it was when you put it there.....I agree the problems must be fixed with in the private sector, but that isn't going to happen when greed rules over compassion and justice.....

There are only two entities: the private sector (individuals and businesses) and the government.

What is the "public sector"?

clarification...."public sector" is government....public "service" you know...although we dont get much service anymore...lol

Public sector = force

Private sector = voluntary

Never forget it.

Exactly!  Gift of gab and nothing else.  NAFTA  and the US loses millions of high paying manufacturing jobs and they are replaced with what?  Oh right service industry jobs at about 80% of what the lost salary was if you get a job.  Now we are all going to be gainfully employed building road and bridges????????  More smoke and mirrors.

Flash,Raymond, NAFTA didn't send our jobs overseas....the Asian, South Asian and Pacific Rim Asian free trade agreements did.....Obama has already said he is going to close the ta loopholes for the companies that take advantage of that and penalize them, he has also proposed $3000 ta credit for every ne Am erican job developed....now he's proposing stimulating the economy by at least putting people back to work in construction....what else do you want to see? Have you got a plan?

Studius I am fully aware that NAFTA is the North American Free Trade Agreement between U.S., Canada, and Mexico.  The loss of manufacturing jobs, a good portion of it, went to Mexico.  I also know that the wages lost in those manufacturing jobs was more than what those getting jobs now in the service industry can make.  That is fact.  Look on the internet at studies and papers done on NAFTA.  Those that were for it played a numbers game when they talked about the number of jobs it would bring.....just like Obama is with his numbers game and rebuilding bridges and roads.

Thank you Flash 1.. all nafta did besides put under paid Mexican truckers on the road was to create a government subsidized Canadian timber industry,and Industrial ghetto's in Nogalis. This in turn was abandoned for Asian markets. I hope for better from the new administration.. I said Hope

But Flash in regards to this and your previous post I wonder if you actually looked at Obama's proposals...Many of the things you want done he is already proposing...shutting down the tax loopholes for employers that employ overseas, Tax credits of $3000 per position for every new American job developed, up to 50% credit for employer contributions of healthcare benefits, and now a work stimulus....Not sure what else he can do at this point...he can't control "Golden Parachutes" that is against the law for the government to interfere like that. Except in the case of a company wanting funding from us....

That's what I mean.  They can't cry poverty and expect handouts when they are making millions of dollars themselves.  I do not agree with Obama and his thinking he can give 95% of the people tax breaks while increasing speading.  That is impossible.  As for heathcare, I do not want worse healthcare not do I want to pay more than I already do to pay for somebody else.  As for bringing in "new American jobs" construction doesn't cut it.  Most of the people out there that don't have jobs, and kids coming out of college, are not physical workers.  They lost manufacturing and other white collar jobs.  Obama is trying to compare apples with oranges.  They are not the same thing. 

Flash...FINALLY, something we agree on...NAFTA was a huge mistake....sent many valuable production jobs to Mexico....and the result is substandard goods and lost jobs...nothing good came out of it that I can see....

Oh isn't that the Clintons who put us into the black after the abyss yet another Bush put us into?

JustLynn Look up Hawaii and how it almost went bankrupt trying a "universal" type health care system.  They cgave it up to save the state.  From what I've read the pilot in Massachusetts is not doing too well either.  For everyone to be covered, it means freeloaders get it without earning it and someone else has to work to pay for it (usually more than their fair share).  I don't believe it should be the middle class's lot in life to have to support those that choose to bilk the system.  Systems don't work because of the abuse to them.  If government would get after those that are abusing the system, perhaps we wouldn't be getting taxed through the nose to pay for such much and states like NY wouldn't be in as bad a financial mess.

Thank you for your thought provoking comment. Yes, these are a few of the things that would strengthen the economy. It will take years to unravel the third worlding of America. I hope that the president elect is the Man to lead the assault. That remains to be seen. Good luck and good skill to all of us. service jobs will never nor should they replace Professional,Tech,or trade skill professions. i for one can not live on 7 Bucks per dollar,nor should I have to. it is time to hold the corporations accountable for the out sourcing of America. lets start by reaching with in for solutions, by stimulating thought and conversation with follow through, we will prevail ..

Flash...you are already paying for the "freeloaders" as you so benevolently call them....you pay for healthcare for every prisoner, every illegal immigrant, and every welfare recipient in the US. Should you not AT LEAST get the same health care they get? And states cannot enact a one payer health care system because they do not have the power or the resources of the Federal government, so trying to compare what a state can do with what the Fed can do is pointless. If the Fed said to every insurance company and every pharmaceutical company in America..."This IS the coverage you will provide and this IS what you will get paid for it, or you will not do business with the US Gov", that would hold a hell of a lot more weight than Hawaii telling them that....they just move out of Hawaii and go elsewhere. If it is NATIONALIZED, where exactly are they going to go?

there is a small problem with your health care argument of comparison to france's system.  we have a much much large population than france.  hence the government bureaucracy in place to run the system would be many times larger.  the larger a bureaucracy is, the more wasteful and costly it is.  a nationalized health care system WILL cost billions and billions more in tax payer funds even if we were to reduce it to 10% of our GDP.  somebody has to provide the money for the program and it isn't going to appear out of thin air.  it will come from you and me in the form of increased taxes.  sorry but i dont trust my health to a government run system that is sure to be as poorly ran and wasteful as most government programs.  of course we are a socialist country now, so it will be no surprise when the government socializes, and reduces the quality of health care.

The government bureaucracy to run the system is already in place. The Medicare system already has all the needed employees and "paperwork" set in place to deal with the hospitals and insurance companies across the nation. While medicare does have it's own problems, those are more problems of amount of pay to hospitals and problems with the drug plan, NOT problems with the "day to day operations"....

The number of people in the population is a moot point. More people, more taxpayer dollars to run the system with...It is the percentage of GDP that is comparable, and ours is far too high for far too little services...And I hold after doing YEARS of research on the subject AND being directly involved with health care that it would work....

But, as seems to be the case here 9 times out of 10, we can agree only to disagree....

And Ceanf...we have been a socialist country since Medicare, Medicaid, and Social Security were enacted....we just have the BAD parts of socialism....many very, very successful and "Happy" populations live in countries that have a combination of socialism and capitalism....

JustLynn - You don't have to agree to disagree with me.  I think you are right.

I used Hawaii as an example on a smaller scale.  The federal government is in debt.  Why would you think doing such a upheavel of a system that didn't work on a small scale would work on a large one?  Look at how great social security is working.  We are going to give a 5.8% increase to people who probably didn't even put in as much as they are now getting because they are living longer.  I don't expect to see one red cent of all the money I have put towards social social.  Now they keep wanting you to work longer (if you can hold on to your job) so that you die because you see that you don't have any social security money to collect.  In tough times a 5.8% increase?  Know what I got at work?  Let's just say it wasn't even half of that. 

Thats the point Flash...IT CANT work on a smaller scale...A NATIONALIZED health care plan needs to be just that, with the NATIONAL GOVERNMENT behind it for it to work. When the national government goes to all of the insurance companies and hospitals and drug companies and says " Okay...insurance companies: you are going to provide THIS level of coverage and you WILL take this amount of money for it, or you wont get any business from the US Gov. Hospitals: You WILL charge this much for daily rates for each level of care, or you wont do business with the US Gov. Drug Companies: You WILL accept this amount for each drug you produce, or you won't do business with the US Gov"...THAT is a huge amount of power....

Lower it to a smaller scale and it has NO effect...all of those entities just do business elsewhere...It's the power of there NOT being an "elsewhere" that makes it both very powerful AND very possible.....

and Ceanf...tell me about the health care you have now...do you have insurance? co-pays? deductible? "pre-approval" powers held by the insurance company? drug "formularies" to determine what drugs they will pay for and what they wont pay for"? required "referrals" from primary care physicians for "specialty" care?  With nationalized, one payer health care you can say goodbye to all of that....and good bye to people with what they THOUGHT was "good" insurance going bankrupt when a horrible illness strikes and they can't even afford the 20% that insurance doesn't pay....ALL GONE WITH A ONE PAYER SYSTEM.......

When the Gov controls your health care the Gov controls you. I hope you like the road to totalitarianism/authoritarianism because that's what you are clamoring for.

It amazes me how some people think they deserve the property of others.

The government will not be controlling your health care. Ask any medicare part a/b recipient how much trouble they get from the government for getting a bill paid, or seeing what ever doctor they want.

What amazes me is that some people seem to think that it is better to waste hundreds of billions so they can pretend they have health care freedom rather than creating a much more efficient system that gives everyone access to affordable health care and preventative care, resulting in a healthier society, more productivity, and less drag on the economy.

So the free market brings the highest quality of goods and services to market for the lowest price for everything except health care. I get it.

Do you even have a clue how much waste fraud and abuse there is in medicare/aid?

One estimate states that fraud and abuse cost Medicare and Medicaid about $33 billion each year. Worse, it's ridiculously easy to cheat the federal government and taxpayers out of millions of Medicare and Medicaid dollars, according to three convicted felons appearing yesterday before a Senate panel.

Source

"If you think health care's expensive now, just wait untill it's free"

P.J. O'Rourke

PJ O'Rourke is full of @!$%#....Most of the fraud of Medicare is perpetrated by doctors, and most of the abuse is perpetrated by people on Medicaid who don't give a @!$%# about going to an ER for "basic" care because "they arent paying for it", WE ARE....

Frances health care system is a COMBINATION of government paid insurance AND private, supplemental insurance if you choose to purchase it. EVERY French citizen is covered, and they get to CHOOSE THEIR OWN DOCTORS.....there are no waiting times for surgeries....and it is built on "layered" care, so if you have strep throat you go to an appropriate center to get treated. Unlike the US, where MILLIONS without health insurance flood the Emergency rooms across the country for bull@!$%# stuff like sore throats and the flu, French citizens can go to a clinic for much less money....

Every time someone walks through the door of my ER, it cost a minimum of $1000, be it for a cold or a heart attack....over the long run, MILLIONS of dollars are WASTED by improper use of available resources....under the French system, the PROPER resources are abundant and are utilized in a cost efficient manner....If someone shows up at an ER in France and has a cold, they are given an appointment card for a CLINIC, they are not seen in the ER, thus unclogging an already grossly misused system. We dont have that option here in the US, WE HAVE TO SEE EVERYONE IN THE ER...they cannot be sent to a lower, more appropriate level of care....THAT is the abuse of the system.....

Maybe a few pages were missing out of Obama's history books.  Obviously, it was tried and failed.  What saved us was WWII.  Maybe we shouldn't mention that;-)

Tough2Name,

Well, nobody wants war, and I don't think anybody is advocating that. However, the effect that wars have on public psychology is to motivate large numbers of people to set aside their previous concerns for the greater good and do other, more important things. That mass psychological change is what makes good things come out of wars. (but this is a different topic that the point of this discussion...)

In so far as plans go, it is naieve to think that what failed to work before (for good reason) will work now. Technology has changed the workforce picture such that spending billions, even hundreds of billions, on infrastructure in the next few years simply will not put that many people back to work, and even if it did, what will they all do when their construction projects are completed? move on to that next government-sponsored contract? (more billions of public $$)...and the one after that? (even more billions of public $$).

Do you see how that may not be all that helpful? When you neighbor's construction firm puts those 40 guys to work (but not you) building a bridge for 12 months, that's great for him and those 40 guys, but their salaries come out of YOUR taxes (by way of a VERY financially inefficient process, I might add).  You will not benefit from that infrastructure investment for over a year, and even then, other than having a nice bridge to drive over, you do not benefit financially very directly at all. The only way you benefit financially is if that fixed bridge helps generate more commerce and economic activity in your community...and THAT is when you stand to benefit.

Replacing existing but broken/failing infrastructure won't grow the economy very much at all, but it will help keep it from shrinking (as in: "Hey, the sewers aren't backing up in this neighborhood anymore! Let's stay"). Building BRAND NEW Infrastructure, so that new business and commerce start happening in an area, now THAT is really worth an investment.  But then, that's not exactly what he's talking about here, is it? (nope, but then that's called DEVELOPMENT, an _evil— word, I know...)

War was not the intentional Fix All for the Great depression. It was simply the inertia that provided the Jobs. NOBODY wants or advocates War,Say munitions manufacturers and certain factions of the Military machine.

A comprehensive plan has more than one part - any one part may not be ideal or the answer, but an answer as part of a multi-faceted plan.

Repairing and replacing bridges is necessary. Repairing and building new roads is necessary. I'd rather have my tax dollars go to those ends than than paying unemployment benefits. Alternative energy technologies will be ongoing - and reduce our dependence on foreign oil in the long run. Fuel efficient cars will also benefit us to that end as well as help our planet. Common sense, about our needs now and in the future.

And, as I've stated time and again -  that as long as people continue (or are allowed to continue) to benefit AT THE EXPENSE of those who work and create this country's wealth, all of it will be a losing proposition. I don't care if it's the corporate executive expecting the golden parachute while sinking a company,  the blue collar worker expecting more and more (wages and benifits) for less (work and quality), the consumer outspending his income, or the welfare recipient expecting something for nothing - the greed mentality has got to end.

Your narrow mindedness shows in your post.  I will point out the 2 options available to you and you can pick one:

1)  Continue to lose more and more jobs.  Millions more on unemployemnt where they will stay for an undetermined amount of time while the economy continues to decline creating even more unemployed.  Litterally millions of people receiving unemployment benefits and other subsidy programs for which we will need to borrow billions of dollars.

2)  Borrow billions of dollars to fix roads, bridges, etc.  Put millions of people to work.  Collect taxes from their paychecks and repay the loans.  Create even more jobs in the only area of our economy that isn't suffering:  energy.  Creating millions of jobs while collecting taxes from their paychecks and WOW even becoming energy independent.

To me it is an easy choice......but go ahead and pick one for yourself.

Ceanf....not to be derogatory, but you seem to live in a very sad, fantasy world. Do you really think our 10 trillion dollar plus deficit will EVER be paid off? The best hope we have is to balance the rising deficit with an increased tax income paid by workers who are in newly created jobs. Our debt is a "paper" debt...our paychecks pay our bills and allow us to eat...

Of course number 2 is the better option, but I think you are overly optimistic without having any details.  Are these jobs going to pay enough to even collect federal income taxes on to repay loans?  With all the proposed "tax credits" I have my doubts.  You do know that currently something like 40% of workers end up with no federal tax liability, right?  If they are that high paying of jobs, and it will employ 2.5 million for a couple of years, plus the cost of materials, how much are we talking about spending?  I tend to find that most things sound good.....the devil is always in the details.

We can argue all day long about hypothetical theories. 

Reality is more jobs is better than less jobs.  More people putting into the economy is better than less people.  More people out of the unemployment line is better than more people in the unemployment line. 

There is nothing that can be argues about those statement.  They are a fact.  After that the details get easier.

Here you go Crystal...Wanna trade places with them?

According to the Urban-Brookings Tax Policy Center, it is true that 38 percent of "tax units" -- which can be singles, couples, or families -- are projected to have zero or negative income tax liability in 2009. About 60 percent of these households make $20,000 per year or less.

However, being exempt from income tax does not mean you're exempt from federal taxes. Everyone who works is liable for payroll taxes, contributions to Medicare and Social Security that come out of every paycheck. There are also excise taxes on some goods and services, most notably the 18.4 cents per gallon tax on gasoline. The Congressional Budget Office found that earners in the lowest quintile, where most of those with no income tax liability fall, shouldered 4.3 percent of the payroll tax burden in 2005 and 11.1 percent of the excise taxes. Their effective tax rate (which is calculated by dividing taxes paid by total income) in those categories, according to the CBO, was in fact significantly higher than the rate of the top quintile, although that top one-fifth of the population had a much higher effective tax rate for individual and corporate income taxes.

Doesn't sound so great to be one of those who pay "no " taxes now does it? And it's "not exactly" NO federal tax liability is it?

Just: Our family has been there and WORKED our way out.  And you know what, it isn't as terrible as most like to make it sound.  Basically, the difference between 6 years ago (when we lived below the poverty line) and now is we have more stuff, and it is nicer stuff, and we are able to save more than we used to(yep, we saved money when we were pretty much dirt poor for this countries standards).  So, throwing the pity card really doesn't work on me since I've been there, done that, and all without a single dime of assistance from the government :-)

Well Im glad that worked out for you and your family Crystal....but does that make you better than people who DO need help to get out of that situation?  Guess what? I was there with my 4 kids...after I got divorced we lived on child support from their father and food stamps. In order to get an education and lift myself out of that situation I had to send my children to live with their father, because he made about 3x more than I did but got out of paying a decent amount of child support through loop holes. After they went to their father's I took out student loans and educated myself and got 3 degrees and got my kids back. I now make about 4-5 TIMES what I made when my kids left. And I donate my time and my money so that someone else out there can have the same chances I had...a little "pity" for others isn't a BAD thing Crystal...it's a HUMAN thing.....

not: True....but are these jobs replacing ones lost as of today, or the ones that will result from the minimum wage increase next year, or the further increases proposed, strike that, promised by Obama by 2011?  Or are these to replace the ones that would be caused if Obama's healthcare plan is put into action? Hmmmm sounds like we would be breaking even in the job department before even adressing jobs already lost.  Or should we forget about those things people based their vote on?

Just: Thanks for your encouragement.  We are big believers in charity and give and volunteer accordingly (actually I'm mainly the volunteer, my hubby really doesn't have time between work and school).  The thing is one Obama plan by itself is okay, it is when you stack on ALL the layers he has promised, you are going to still be in a hole, and possibly a deeper one.  See 19.8.  Now I do think working on infrastructure is great in itself and could get behind it, but I'm not willing to dellude myself into believing that it will make a huge impact in the economy, but will make for nice travel when all done, alternative energy etc.

  Raising the minimum wage is great (even though no one should think you are going to have a great material standard of living), except for the ones who lose their jobs to pay for the raises for their co-workers.  All you end up doing is shifting the money around, say between next years minimum wage (7.25) and the promised 9.25 or 55 can't remember now.  That means if a company is making the same amount, it would have to lay off 1 worker to pay 3 workers. 

Crystal...as you can see if you read farther up , I DO NOT think minimum wage should be raised. All that does is cause a rise in costs of goods and services. IF minimum wage could be raised WITH a concurrent price freeze, then it MIGHT help. If not, it won't help at all.

And I disagree with your statement that nationalized health care will cause loss of jobs. It actually INCREASES jobs in the health care industry because it creates a layered system with more community clinics, urgent care clinics and primary care centers. Patients that show up in an ER and don't need to be there are sent to these clinics, and it decreases ER wait times and unclogs a terrible clooged system by giving people more options of where to go for care...APPROPRIATE use of resources, which in turn further lowers costs....

Just: i get you are for universal healthcare, i am not...I like my private insurance and I like how much it costs me as opposed to Obama's plan, which would cost me more, and for something we very rarely use.  Low or no cost insurance encourages abuses like going to the Doctor for the common cold.  Also while France may have a great plan, it is no where the size of our country or even similar in lifestyle.  We will have to agree to disagree ;-) 

 Really the statement about costing jobs is not my idea, it was the conclusion of Tax Policy Center.....job losses and stagnant wages. 

I'm happy that someone coming more from the left than myself sees that endless wage increases are not the fix all for the poor.  Eveyone seems to think the money to pay for it comes out of thin air....when it comes from a job loss or higher prices which offset the wage increases anyhow.  I thought I was the only one to notice the jump in prices at fast food places and stores since this last raise.  So that is encouraging:-)

Crystal...I really don't think nationalized health care would cost anyone anymore than we already pay. If you could see some of the things I see, you would understand that we already spend billions and billions on health care for certain people. If that money was redirected into health care for everyone, I dont think anyone would see a rise in their taxes. And I am glad you have insurance you like, and that you don't have to use it very often. I will pray that you never have to use it, because you WILL find out it isn't as good as you may thing it is.....

And I think that , in general, "libs" and "cons" are a lot closer in ideals than they think they are...

Good luck to you and your family in the upcoming days and years....

Good luck and God Bless to your family as well!

Our insurance is really good ( we have had a couple minor surgeries over the years in our family of 6, but we usually only go to the doctor a handful of times a year between all of us) and between what we pay and the employer it costs $4k a year.  Obama's plan premiums as a percentage of income as related to the poverty line, meaning we would pay $9k for it.  I doubt I am the only one in that boat!

Crystal...I really don't think nationalized health care would cost anyone anymore than we already pay.

That is one of the most ignorant things I've ever seen anyone post. Take a look at medicare and medicaid. You seem to think the folks at the DMV should be in charge of your health care. I'm sorry but you have to be out of your mind.

You are certainly entitled to your opinion Wayne....an opinion I am SURE is backed up by years of research....hmmm...ignorant is a new one....nice to see you have expanded from idiot and moron....

I feel sorry for you....life must be very hard when you are so closed minded and judgemental....Good luck to you...

Waynster, try looking at the overhead of Medicare. it is 3%. That means 97% of themoney sent into medicare gets spend on the patients.

Go look at your average HMO or PPO, the administrative costs range from 10% to 30%. the having a government run payer system will be a lot cheaper for the same level of services you currently get from your hmo/ppo.

Please try to see beyong the job itself.  Look at the big picture. 

Lets pretend that building bridges and roads will create 100,000 jobs.  I don't know about where you live but any major highway project in my neck of the woods taks at least 2 years.  Those people are now earning a living.  Paying and taxes and the big kicker to it all......buying things.  This inturn creates more jobs in the retail sector.  The new employees in the reatil sector   (yep you guessed it)  pay taxes and spend money.  The retail sector then need to expand and build new buildings or remodels of old buildings, that will re-employ contruction crews.  Those new buildings will need access and roads and parking lots.  That's where the roads and bridge crews come back in the picture. 

There is your real fix. 

The moral of the story is....jobs jobs jobs.... most of the problems we have today can be solved with jobs. 

not over it.....You are only see the job itself but in that big picture?  There are many people that are computer programmers, different types of managers, assistants, human resource reps., teachers, financial types, insurance agents, etc.  Your theory is great for the small sector (construction and possibly a few small businesses) but that does not bring jobs to the types of white collar jobs I refer to.  That was the point I'm trying to make.  Your moral of the story is only jobs jobs jobs for a few.

There are white collars jobs in every business.  Construction companies use computers.  Now that I think of it, every business in the world uses computers.  They also need project managers, architects, office personnel, secretaries on and on and on.  There may not be as many as you like but we have to start somewhere.  But hey....forget it.  We'll just keep piling on people to the unemployment lines and call it a day.  That will bring us all a nice future don't you think. 

The plan Obama has is immediate.  Not a slow build in an already slow economy.

Flash....I think that no matter what Obama does it will "not work" as far as you are concerned....Im sorry that your glass is always half empty....perhaps that is why you are where you are...

I prefer a half full glass approach...as far as Im concerned any number of people getting any new jobs is a good thing....

So we disagree...and wait and see...

Flash1 -

I never agreed with your band-aid theory.

Of course we have to start somewhere or we never start.  Nothing is always perfect all the time and may need adjusting as we go but creating jobs is creating jobs.

Jobs beget jobs.  Some you will like and some you won't.  Some will be for you and some will be for your neighbor down the street whose home is in foreclosure.  Jobs create money and spending and more tax revenues.  All of those things are good.

There is not a downside to his plan.  Obama is not proposing to just throw money into infrastructure for the fun of it.  It has the upside of being critically important.  Our roads and bridges are in dire need of repairs and maintenance and local and state budgets don't have the revenue to do it.  I think we could learn a thing or two about turning a blind eye to infrastructure needs by remembering the bridge collapse in Minneapolis.

Investing money in becoming energy independent is also a good thing.  That is an ever expanding field that I'm sure will create jobs that even you will approve of. 

The other option is to just give up on everything and continue as we are.  Unless you have a better idea.

Flash: I agree...but you are fighting a losing battle.  IMO many are perfectly content to see the promise of new jobs dangled right in their face.  So much so, that they are unable to see in their peripherial vision the job losses that will result from many of the other policies:-(

What job losses would you be referring to specifically? 

It's pointless Not....they are dead set that any plan Obama has is going to fail, and won't believe any different no matter what facts or statistics you present to them....this is pretty typical of debates on here...they aren't popular if there aren't cat fights and bickering, and as soon as you present irrefutable facts and statistics, the conversation ends....

Flash - I have a news flash for you.  A nuclear plant is not exactly comparable to roads and bridge repair and maintenance.  I believe we are all aware of the controversy surrounding Nuclear power.  I believe that we should steer in that direction but wind, solar and other energy plans are already in the making and will be quick to get up and running with some funding.

LOLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLL Unbelievable!  Talk about one track minds.  Totally ignore the point why don't you.  Here's a newsflash for you....it costs more to put up windpower that you ever get the benefit from.  That's why the project was dropped on Long Island.  Obviously my point was about jobs not nuclear or wind power.  You are not talking to some 18 yr. old kid.

Flash...I am only assuming that which can be inferred from your postings...and I think Crystal is intelligent enough to speak for Crystal...she seems to argue from a much more "centrist" position than the one you have adopted and doesn't talk in sweeping generalizations or pin point ONE problem and generalize it to anything similar...Crystal argues her beliefs and listens to others RESPECTFULLY...

And I believe if you will read back, Crystal said "many" are willing to see only what is in their face...I don't believe she said "JustLynn, you are only willing to see what is dangled in your face"....

I would guess that  a nuclear plant on Long Island not working out had more to do with cost over runs and nuclear energy regulation than anything else....

And your statement about wind power has been proven wrong several times over...almost everyone who has instituted use of wind power has enough power that they are able to power all their own needs AND sell the excess back to the power companies....

Wind power is still in the early stages of development.  A lot like computers when they first started.  A computer to run a small business filled an entire room.  Or do you not believe in advancing technology?  Is it your belief that we cannot make things better anymore, we have peaked? 

I believe that we have barely scratched the surface on alternate energy possibilities and new jobs will come with it especially in the white collar fields.

Not: About job losses see 19.8 where I addressed this earlier with you.

        I agree that alternative energy sources need investment, ALL of them, as one alone would not be enough in this country. 

     I am not convinced Obama's plan economic plan is terrible, but I do believe the impact of it is not going to live up to his or most expectations, especially in conjunction with his other plans.  I believe investing in infrastructure is much needed but, I want specifics and it not just to give some people busy work that ends up, for lack of a better word, half&%$ just for the sake of it.  I do not mind my tax dollars going for it, IF it will be done right!

Just : I accidently put this comment in where it should be with 21, sorry :-) Obama wants to bring back the WPA to help out the economy it did not work the first time around, fact. I am yet to see statistics that show raising taxes increases overall revenue, raising the minimum wage somehow makes it a meaningful wage(which you also disagree with), that Obama healthcare plan will save the taxpayers money or will decrease costs of healthcare overall in a meaningful way.  Shall I go on or would you like to provide that statistics and facts to just these first before we continue?  Unless you psted these types of things in postings other than where you and I have been discussing, I have not seen presented as single thing other than your opinion that the US could have universal healthcare  that is a great as France's, which I have never seen a statistic on and cannot be proven fact unless it is implemented. UHC is NOT Obama's plan and is a moot point, but good for a separate discussion:-)

Hopefully none of this sounds snippy, I'm trying to do a couple things at once ;-)

Since there aren't any immediate plans to raise taxes or implement national health care, I am going to ignore them for now and address the immediate proposal of investing in infrastructure and alternative energy. 

The infrastructure of this country has been ignored for years and is in dire need.  Obama isn't throwing money out there for the hell of it or do you not remember the Minneapolis bridge collapse and all the reports that came out after the nation wide inspections?

Alternative energy expansion is not a passing whim that is going to fade away.  It is here to stay.  We need to get on board as quickly as possible and start cultivating those jobs.

As for minimum wage.  I only have one personal reference regarding that.  I work with someone that owns several chain fast food restaurants.  In our state the minimum wage was up for election and he vehemently protested the idea swearing it would raise the costs of everything and he would lose customers.  After along election the measure passed.  The minimum wage went up 80 cents over 2 years.  He calculated how much he would have to raise his prices to pay for the raise.  He came to me shocked that he only has to raise everything 10 cents.  Since it wasn't nearly as horrible as he thought it would be he went ahead and raised everything 20 cents.  He said "he might as well add a little more profit because he didn't think it would have an impact. 

That was two years ago and he miraculously didn't lose any customers.

Agree with most of your statements. 

 I would like to point out that there is a world of difference in two years ago and these next two years, and that 80 cents and two dollars are a world apart, especially in a lower cost of living state.  Your friend is lucky in that fast food isn't suffering since many  middle class casual diners are now going to the fast food level.  The owners of say Benigan's weren't so lucky.

If you are more interested in the here and now, rather than the future, more power to you.  I'm a planner and need to know everything coming down the line so I don't have to hustle around at the last minute, and I prefer to make an informed decision.  In my experience reactionary decision making is usuallyturns out to be the least effective decisions.

never enough money to do what is right.

Then if it is as you say, that makes it an even more useless example to use to point out that alternatives don't work. It was never given the chance TO work, and that had nothing to do with whether it COULD have worked or not. Wind power and solar power are both PROVEN methods of producing energy....and I don't think you have to have an evacuation plan with either method....

Let me ask you this....Why do you chose to ignore the fact that part of the reason the project on Long Island was scrapped was because it was too costly and the study that was done PROVED that?  A study done by experts. 

In my last post, I ACKNOWLEDGED what you posted about cost and blockage of the project, so how is that ignoring it?

I wasn't talking about nuclear power, you were. And what does the cost of a nuclear plant have to do with the cost of wind and solar power? BOTH are already being used and have been proven to be very cost efficient....

LOL I was talking about the plant and how it ended up being just temporary work like the construction jobs will be.  I didn't associate it to wind and solar power you did.

"Then if it is as you say, that makes it an even more useless example to use to point out that alternatives don't work. It was never given the chance TO work, and that had nothing to do with whether it COULD have worked or not. Wind power and solar power are both PROVEN methods of producing energy....and I don't think you have to have an evacuation plan with either method...."  How is this acknowledging the fact that it is very costly?

Okay....so let's go backwards then and start over...THAT job on THAT road might be over, but there are millions and millions of miles of highways in this country that are constantly breaking down just due to time, use, and the elements. Same for bridges and tunnels... the levy's in New Orleans could be rebuilt, dam's could be built to harness hydroelectric power, which would generate more jobs.....one doesn't have to be a trained construction worked to yeild a shovel, and as anyone who owns a home knows, "fix ups" never end......

You still don't get it.  That all does sound great but building a levy in New Orleans is ONE project that does not help the white collar worker.  As an example, do you think a teacher that lost her job because the school she taught at say...was destroyed in the hurricane....is going to be rebuilding a levy?  She is out of work.  I'm not saying it doesn't help.  I'm saying it only helps the blue collar worker not the white collar worker and we are losing WAY more white collar jobs than blue collar jobs.

No, she might not be helping to rebuild the levy...but when her school gets rebuilt she gets her job back, doesnt she? Show me the statistics that say we are losing more white collar jobs.....

Not to sound mean....but I am not in any way in favor of putting more tax dollars into rebuilding a large city sitting below sea level in hurricane country.  The fact that anyone would want to defies logic to me.  I know that yes there is the port, but for someone to live there willingly, is just plain ignorant and they had better have darn good insurance or the money to rebuild themselves.

Honestly, Im not so sure I am either...thats why I also have very little compassion for people in California that build on the egde of cliffs then cry when their home falls in the ocean due to erosion....DUH?!?!?

Possibly if it does get rebuilt.  If the consolidate the children into another school, which does happen, she doesn't.  Millions of manufacturing jobs gone to Mexico and some to Canada, many of the call centers outsourced to India, all the computer help desks in India, the textile industry which also went to Mexico....just to name a few.

http://hippiechick42068.newsvine.com/_news/2008/11/22/2139812-you-got-screwed-ceos-made-a-fortune?last=1227403164&threadId=425872&commentId=4171800#c4171800

So Flash...go here and read people's ideas for getting some of those jobs back...it does NO good to complain about a problem if you have no solution in mind....

Apparently you chose to not read what I said earlier.  I'm going out.  I have better things to do than listen to your accusations.  I wish you luck.

Accusations??? WOW...defensive much??

You have done nothing but make accusations and assumptions -- fact not being defensive from the beginning.  You've ignored statements, you changed the meaning of statements, and you've tried acting like you know something about me.  You don't.

Okay Flash...whatever you say...I invite anyone else to read through our exchange and come to the same conclusion about my behavior that you have....

Have a nice night...

Cristal,

Maybe someone should tell the dutch to get out of their country then.

JustLynn:

Here is just one quote that you made: "Flash....I think that no matter what Obama does it will "not work" as far as you are concerned....Im sorry that your glass is always half empty....perhaps that is why you are where you are..."

Behind:  The dutch are not of my concern.....I'm pretty sre very few of my tax dollars are paying to rebuild for them ;-)

The point was that as long as the right systems are in place, there is no need to worry about a city that sits below sea level.

I would guess that  a nuclear plant on Long Island not working out had more to do with cost over runs and nuclear energy regulation than anything else....

Flash...THIS was my response in 22.3 to your statement in 21...you know, the statement you said I IGNORED??

Thanks for the informational post. 

I am glad to see that my birthstate (MI) would be good for something, as it is the pits now.....I hate going back to visit friends and family there.

I think as you describe it it would be ideal. 

We have always enjoyed driving thru Indiana on the way home from MI, as we love to look at those farms along the Interstate over the nothingness of Ohio.  My husband was offered a job in the Fort Wayne area a few years ago, but turned it down because I am not big on winter anymore, call me spoiled.  It was worth considering though....but I am confident that all the money in the world would not move me back to MI.

When you are driving from South Bend to Indianapolis, the wind blows so hard across US 31 it can blow your car off the road in the winter....sounds like wind turbine heaven to me....

Rebuilding infrastructure is not"designing and building roads and bridges" as you stated, it is fixing the exisiting ones. And that takes supervisors AND workers. Developing alternative energy sources does require highly educated planners and developers....but it also requires people to build and install those technologies...and some of those technologies already exist...they just need to be installed and implemented in greater numbers.... these ARE diverse jobs....